Release 2.11.0

[kgyrtkirk]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

@fabriziomello, @pmwkaa: please review this pull request.

Powered by pull-review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #5684 (7dffd76) into main (19dd7bb) will decrease coverage by 5.80%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 7dffd76 differs from pull request most recent head b3c8ca7. Consider uploading reports for the commit b3c8ca7 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5684      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   87.71%   81.92%   -5.80%     
==========================================
  Files         231      229       -2     
  Lines       54805    52162    -2643     
  Branches    12056    11376     -680     
==========================================
- Hits        48072    42732    -5340     
+ Misses       4925     4527     -398     
- Partials     1808     4903    +3095     

see 207 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[mahipv]

we generally add this upgrade recommendation based on severity of the fixes, something like.

"This release contains bug fixes since the 2.10.3 release.
We recommend that you upgrade at the next available opportunity."

[kgyrtkirk]

as it also contains features; I've added:

This release contains new features and bug fixes since the 2.10.3 release.
We deem it moderate priority for upgrading.

[mkindahl]

Some typos.

[antekresic]

Are we missing the SQL downgrade path?

[kgyrtkirk]

Are we missing the SQL downgrade path?

that change used to come in with the post-upgrade changeset to main

I'm just trying to follow the footsteps of earlier releases:
91b4a66
cd4509c

2nd main commit:
c8c50da
08bb21f

[mkindahl]

I assumed that you just moved the data from latest-dev to the upgrade file and made no changes, but it does not show up as a rename in GitHub. If you have made any changes, could you please mention what they were so that they can be reviewed?

[kgyrtkirk]

I assumed that you just moved the data from latest-dev to the upgrade file and made no changes, but it does not show up as a rename in GitHub. If you have made any changes, could you please mention what they were so that they can be reviewed?

its not a move because the file is recreated with empty content!

it looks the same to me:

dev@r211:~/timescaledb$ md5sum sql/updates/2.10.3--2.11.0.sql
0b4de16d097165c6efc3fc0681d1c793  sql/updates/2.10.3--2.11.0.sql
dev@r211:~/timescaledb$ git show sql/updates/latest-dev.sql  |patch -p0 -R 
patching file sql/updates/latest-dev.sql
dev@r211:~/timescaledb$ md5sum sql/updates/latest-dev.sql
0b4de16d097165c6efc3fc0681d1c793  sql/updates/latest-dev.sql

earlier changesets have also didn't listed is as a rename: 91b4a66 cd4509c

[iroussos]

Thank you @kgyrtkirk, I have added a few small changes to the changelog, mainly the noteworthy features section.

@gina-alioto @nenadmalic an optional request for you: do you mind also quickly checking the high level list with the noteworthy features in case my suggestions do not make? Thank you!

[iroussos]

Don't forget to update the date once we finalize the release date

[kgyrtkirk]

@iroussos @gina-alioto @nenadmalic could you please take another look?

[iroussos]

Thank you @kgyrtkirk, the latest version looks good to me!